MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391331680 · doi:10.2196/48860

Toxic Relationships Described by People With Breast Cancer on Reddit: Topic Modeling Study

2024· article· en· W4391331680 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Cara A. Davidson, Richard Booth, Kimberley T. Jackson, Tara Mantler

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerDomestic violenceSocial supportAbandonment (legal)ShamePsychologySocial mediaSocial psychologyMedicinePoison controlSuicide preventionCancerEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social support is essential to promoting optimal health outcomes for women with breast cancer. However, an estimated 12% of women with breast cancer simultaneously experience intimate partner violence (IPV; physical, psychological, or sexual abuse by an intimate partner). Women who experience IPV during breast cancer may lack traditional social support, and thus seek out alternative sources of support. Online community forums, such as Reddit, can provide accessible social connections within breast cancer-specific communities. However, it is largely unknown how women with breast cancer use Reddit to describe and seek support for experiences of IPV. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore how patients with breast cancer describe toxic relationships with their partners and immediate family members on Reddit. METHODS: This exploratory, cross-sectional, topic-modeling study analyzed textual data from 96 users in the r/breastcancer subreddit in February 2023. The meaning extraction method, inclusive of principal component analysis, was used to identify underlying components. Components were subjected to sentiment analysis and summative content analysis with emergent categorical development to articulate themes. RESULTS: Seven themes emerged related to toxic relationships: (1) contextualizing storytelling with lymph nodes, (2) toxic behavior and venting emotions, (3) abandonment and abuse following diagnosis, (4) toxic relationships and social-related fears, (5) inner strength and navigating breast cancer over time, (6) assessing social relationships and interactions, and (7) community advice and support. Toxic relationships were commonly characterized by isolation, abandonment, and emotional abuse, which had profound emotional consequences for patients. Reddit facilitated anonymous venting about toxic relationships that helped patients cope with intense feelings and stress. Exchanging advice and support about navigating toxic relationships during breast cancer were core functions of the r/breastcancer community. CONCLUSIONS: Findings emphasized the value of Reddit as a source of social support for patients with breast cancer experiencing toxic relationships. Clinicians who understand that many patients with breast cancer experience toxic relationships and considerable psychological sequelae are better prepared to support their patients' holistic well-being. Further investigation of Reddit as a possible resource for advice, information, and support has the potential to help inform clinical practice and subsequently, patient health outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207